The GOP will win the Senate and Keep the House

[Arlenton]

Alright, take Arkansas results by year in presidential elections, 2000 51%-45% GOP win, 2004 54%-44% GOP win, 2008 58%-38% GOP win , 2012 60%-36% GOP win. The state is obviously shifting right more and more. You said that there is at most a 30% chance for a GOP win there. Where do you get this info from???? Why is this sight so wrong?

Well, as for your sight, I am not an eye-doctor, so you may want to get your eyes checked at a certified one.

As for Arkansas, it is in Blue and judging by the policies of the population that lives there vs. the policies of the Republicans, well, they do not match. For Arkansas, 25% win for republicans, and that is being generous.

Are you also saying Arkansas is a Democratic state? What?
And what do you mean by "its in the blue"? where are you seeing this?

[Mesrane]

This. The endless gridlock is making Canada more attractive every year.

Dunno, this past year it's seemed like we're actually one of the least fucked-up countries in the Anglosphere. If there's one good thing about living in a system where either party can block everything with barely any effort, it's that it'll always be immensely difficult for things to get completely and totally fucked.

I suppose, but why live in constant, muddy, and often depressing circular and unending semi-dumbfuckery when, minus shit actually getting done in Congress (fingers crossed) when I can build a cabin in British Columbia, live with legislature that gets stuff done (usually) and point and laugh when people still stuck with this Congress groan under the weight of its unending and eternal semi-dumbfuckery?

[Occupied Deutschland]

I'd rather have the status-quo obstructionist bullshit than full Republican control.

Republican control would mean status-quo obstructionist bullshit, at WORST.

Because Presidential veto.

The Senate could call a lot more things to a vote with Republican control, but none of their shit will pass without, at least, a sixty vote majority or, at most, a 2/3rds majority to override Barry's blockage.
...
'Barry's blockage' sounds like the name of some parody clip. Like, one where the Commander-in-Chief is constipated or something.

[Arlenton]

Alright, take Arkansas results by year in presidential elections, 2000 51%-45% GOP win, 2004 54%-44% GOP win, 2008 58%-38% GOP win , 2012 60%-36% GOP win. The state is obviously shifting right more and more. You said that there is at most a 30% chance for a GOP win there. Where do you get this info from???? Why is this sight so wrong?

Well, as for your sight, I am not an eye-doctor, so you may want to get your eyes checked at a certified one.

As for Arkansas, it is in Blue and judging by the policies of the population that lives there vs. the policies of the Republicans, well, they do not match. For Arkansas, 25% win for republicans, and that is being generous.

Im beginning to suspect that you are a very successful troll...

[Mesrane]

The republocrats will win, the world will lose. This is the way things are.

Assuming you are saying what I think you mean, I would have to agree.

[Grenartia]

Whot.

How is the centralization of power and the burning of the southland ever an American Value? How is a war that killed anywhere from 600,000 to 1 Million people ever an American Value? The 1860s and 1870s were terrible decades that saw the destruction of states rights and the American South (thanks Sherman).

States' rights is a concept that needed (and still needs) destruction. All it has ever been used for is "justifying" the oppression of basic human rights. Speaking as a Southerner, the Civil War was basically a parent giving their asshole kid the spanking they deserved. If the South didn't want its ass kicked, it should've thought about that before it decided to throw a temper tantrum over the fact that people were beginning to recognize that people shouldn't be able to own people.

[Wisconsin9]

I'd rather have the status-quo obstructionist bullshit than full Republican control.

Republican control would mean status-quo obstructionist bullshit, at WORST.

Because Presidential veto.

The Senate could call a lot more things to a vote with Republican control, but none of their shit will pass without, at least, a sixty vote majority or, at most, a 2/3rds majority to override Barry's blockage.
...
'Barry's blockage' sounds like the name of some parody clip. Like, one where the Commander-in-Chief is constipated or something.

True enough, all of this.

I wouldn't much mind that joke aimed at Obama. I mean, we've been making fun of Boehner for years, it only seems fair.

[Grenartia]

Nobody wants a gridlock,we all want progress, though we all want our own sides version of progress. Which kinda creates gridlock.

It perplexes me.

Why don't Democrats sit down and negotiate economic policy with Republicans?

Why don't Republicans sit down, and instead of leading countless attempts to repeal the PPACA, works with Democrats to make it better?

It's all about cooperation, not competition. Politics isn't the economy.

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

[Arlenton]

It perplexes me.

Why don't Democrats sit down and negotiate economic policy with Republicans?

Why don't Republicans sit down, and instead of leading countless attempts to repeal the PPACA, works with Democrats to make it better?

It's all about cooperation, not competition. Politics isn't the economy.

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Compromise, I think we need more of it!

[Occupied Deutschland]

It perplexes me.

Why don't Democrats sit down and negotiate economic policy with Republicans?

Why don't Republicans sit down, and instead of leading countless attempts to repeal the PPACA, works with Democrats to make it better?

It's all about cooperation, not competition. Politics isn't the economy.

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Universal healthcare for universal firearm ownership requirements.
We shall have the most healthy militia in the modern world! *nod*

[Mesrane]

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Compromise, I think we need more of it!

So true. When I think of Congress, strangely (or rather not so strangely) I think also of the bloody, brutal, muddy, disease ridden slog that was WW1.

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Nobody wants a lame duck congress? What a surprise.

[Maineiacs]

Anything is better than the gridlock we're experiencing now, if Congress where to unite under one party, that'd be fantastic. Something might actually get done.
Albeit, I would prefer a Democrat dominated Congress, but, again, anything is better than now.

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

[Arlenton]

Compromise, I think we need more of it!

So true. When I think of Congress, strangely (or rather not so strangely) I think also of the bloody, brutal, muddy, disease ridden slog that was WW1.

Me too, especially since im currently watching Apocalypse: WW1

[Arlenton]

Anything is better than the gridlock we're experiencing now, if Congress where to unite under one party, that'd be fantastic. Something might actually get done.
Albeit, I would prefer a Democrat dominated Congress, but, again, anything is better than now.

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I highly doubt that...

[Grenartia]

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Compromise, I think we need more of it!

I think most of the problem comes from the rabid side of the right wing, who consider "compromise" to be a 4 letter word, and would shoot any of their representatives on sight for doing so if they could.

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Universal healthcare for universal firearm ownership requirements.
We shall have the most healthy militia in the modern world! *nod*

Can't tell if serious or just fucking around...

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Anything is better than the gridlock we're experiencing now, if Congress where to unite under one party, that'd be fantastic. Something might actually get done.
Albeit, I would prefer a Democrat dominated Congress, but, again, anything is better than now.

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I wouldn't mind an impeachment, if only Joe Biden wasn't the person who would take over after Obama. I can say with full conviction that Obama is one of the lamest (I won't say worst, because he hasn't done anything particularly horrible; rather, it's his inaction which has led me to say this) Presidents in America's history.

[Maineiacs]

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I highly doubt that...

I'd bet my entire net worth on it. They may not be able to convict, but they will impeach.

[Arlenton]

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I wouldn't mind an impeachment, if only Joe Biden wasn't the person who would take over after Obama. I can say with full conviction that Obama is one of the lamest (I won't say worst, because he hasn't done anything particularly horrible; rather, it's his inaction which has led me to say this) Presidents in America's history.

He tries to, he just can't. Congress doesn't vote with him on many things. Which I kinda don't really mind considering some of the things he tried to pass. Though a bit more compromise would be a lot more better.

[Grenartia]

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I wouldn't mind an impeachment, if only Joe Biden wasn't the person who would take over after Obama. I can say with full conviction that Obama is one of the lamest (I won't say worst, because he hasn't done anything particularly horrible; rather, it's his inaction which has led me to say this) Presidents in America's history.

Questions: What would Obama even be impeached for? And wouldn't any such proceedings be little more than a blatant kangaroo court? And could we then call for the impeachment of the people who impeached Obama?

[Maineiacs]

With the GOP in control of both houses, what will get done is an impeachment -- and nothing else.

I wouldn't mind an impeachment, if only Joe Biden wasn't the person who would take over after Obama. I can say with full conviction that Obama is one of the lamest (I won't say worst, because he hasn't done anything particularly horrible; rather, it's his inaction which has led me to say this) Presidents in America's history.

It's hard to accomplish anything when nothing is allowed to come up for a vote in the House.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Universal healthcare for universal firearm ownership requirements.
We shall have the most healthy militia in the modern world! *nod*

Can't tell if serious or just fucking around...

*nodding intensifies*
*nodding stops*
...
Shit, now I don't know either...

[Arlenton]

I highly doubt that...

I'd bet my entire net worth on it. They may not be able to convict, but they will impeach.

Idk, im not saying that it will never happen, but Im just not seeing enough moderate/establishment republican support for impeachment.

[Grenartia]

I wouldn't mind an impeachment, if only Joe Biden wasn't the person who would take over after Obama. I can say with full conviction that Obama is one of the lamest (I won't say worst, because he hasn't done anything particularly horrible; rather, it's his inaction which has led me to say this) Presidents in America's history.

Questions: What would Obama even be impeached for? And wouldn't any such proceedings be little more than a blatant kangaroo court? And could we then call for the impeachment of the people who impeached Obama?

Also, if you're so pissed off at the inaction, why aren't you pissed off at the people (i.e., the House Republicans) keeping the man from taking any real, effective action, instead of the man who's hands are more or less tied behind his back?

[Wisconsin9]

I'd be fine with the Dems giving up on magazines/assault weapons bans if the Repubs would support true universal healthcare (like Canada and Britain have, and with guarantees that mental health is included) and not trying to further strangle welfare.

Universal healthcare for universal firearm ownership requirements.
We shall have the most healthy militia in the modern world! *nod*

Congratulations, Congress, NSG is doing a better job than you. That's honestly just pathetic.